Note: This is a seattlepi.com reader blog. It is not written or edited by the P-I. The authors are solely responsible for content. E-mail us at newmedia@seattlepi.com if you consider a post inappropriate.

Pray that naysayers are right about climate change

We should all pray that Michelle Bachmann, Rick Perry and the rest of the global warming deniers are right, because, if they are wrong, we are in for a really bad time in days to come.

Why? Because it is almost inconceivable that human beings will take the steps necessary to significantly curtail use of carbon-based energy sources and, thereby, avoid the most catastrophic consequences of rising global temperatures.

Here’s just the latest case in point:

An earnest band of environmentalists is engaged in an ongoing protest in front of the White House. Three hundred of the protesters, including a Hollywood actress and a NASA scientist, have been arrested. Their cause? Stopping a proposed 1,660-mile pipeline that would carry oil extracted from the tar sands of Alberta to refineries on Texas’ Gulf Coast at the rate of 700,000 barrels a day.

The protesters say Obama administration approval of the Keystone XL pipeline would be calamitous. Taking oil from the vast tar fields would decimate Canada’s boreal forests, they contend, while transporting and burning the oil would intensify global warming. Greenhouse gas emissions from the tar sands oil are estimated to be 27 million metric tons a year — 82 percent greater than emissions from the average crude refined in the United States.

Environmentalists have heard President Obama say it is time to rise to the challenge of global warming and begin weaning the country from its oil addiction. But, when it comes to the pipeline, they fear his actions will not match his rhetoric. This week, the State Department gave the go-ahead to the Keystone XL pipeline, insisting the project would not have significant environmental impacts (a conclusion that seems to be at odds with concerns expressed by Obama’s own Environmental Protection Agency).

Energy Secretary Steven Chu also disheartened environmentalists by saying, “Having Canada as a supplier for our oil is much more comforting than having other countries supply our oil.” Essentially, Chu is echoing the most compelling argument of pipeline proponents, which is that we’d be crazy not to replace the crude the U.S. currently imports from problematic sources like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela with abundant oil from our Canadian compatriots. It would be a geopolitical coup and a boost to our economy.

The protesters’ counterargument is a tough sell. They are asking Barack Obama to leave the oil where it is because keeping it in the ground is the only way to prevent the environmental damage it would do. (They might also add that America’s dependence on Saudi oil may be an impetus to switch to more eco-friendly energy sources; this new supply from our friends to the north would make the shift from oil seem less urgent.)

There’s a big hole in the environmentalists’ argument, though. If the Canadians cannot ship their oil to Texas, they will find a different customer. Already, the Canadian government is talking about a Plan B — a pipeline to the Pacific to supply another energy consuming giant: China.

In other words, the oil will be extracted, one way or another. In terms of the effects on the global climate, it makes no difference whether that CO2 goes into the atmosphere from cars driven by Americans or Chinese.

This is a battle the environmentalists seem unlikely to win. And, given the human capacity to ignore future peril when short-term gain is at stake, it is hard to see many other battles that will not be lost, as well. Even as the effects of climate change become less theoretical and more shockingly apparent – retreating glaciers, melting polar ice caps, rising sea levels, extreme and deadly weather patterns – all but the most innocuous remedial steps will be put off. There is not enough political will because there is no collective sense of urgency. Denial is the reflexive stance because the science is too ominous.

So, our only hope is that the deniers are not as crazy as they appear to be.

Note: This is a seattlepi.com reader blog. It is not written or edited by the P-I. The authors are solely responsible for content. E-mail us at newmedia@seattlepi.com if you consider a post inappropriate.